> Ok, TJ, where in your proposal is there a
> definition of the size of the market as the
> basis for maintaining this larger number of
> locomotives in service for a more limited
> time each? Doesn't seem to address the issue
> I was trying to, which is primarily a market
> driven fiscal rather than geographic one.

> It does bring to mind another issue maybe
> worth considering: does size matter? Here we
> have 152 in the same list as 3751. I
> consider 152 a branchline excursion engine,
> unlike the big hulking modern 4-8-4's and
> their ilk. Is it easier to find shortline
> track for lighter stuff to run on? Maybe
> instead of big stuff we sould be looking at
> the light pacifics, consolidations, logging
> mikes, ten wheelers et al. Or, does the size
> of the train they can pull effectively limit
> the return to untenable?

> Dave

I see your point Dave, but can you honestly say that, for instance, a 4449 doesn't draw some from the east, or that a 1361 or 2102 couldn't draw someone from the west or south? And while 152 may be seen as more of a branchline locomotive, I would definitely drive to see here stretch her legs on high iron (and YES, buy a ticket to ride behind her). I also currently see a real dirth of available steam in certain areas of the country, and balancing it in this nature might help to take away from the "This area of the country gets all the steam while we get nothing" mentality. Much of the comments on RYPN, while they never come out and say it, seem to have undertones of this kind of sentiment behind them. For years the South and the West had a monopoly on steam excursions simply because of Southern/NS and UP. Now it seems to kilter even farther to the west in many eyes. This type of approach could, potentially, take that ill-will and unbalance away. Railroads can come around; I admit it doesn't happen often, but suddenly CP is a player that was never there before, and having a single lobby may be the answer to opening up the playing field a little more. It also may field into the market share, as those willing to support mainline steam might be willing to go elsewhere if they have it at home, etc.

You do have a point, however, that 152 could never draw as much as, say, a 3751. On the other hand, maybe that also creates market demand. I believe that a certain pocket 4-8-4 in Ohio has proven that is possible. Maybe GTW 6300's are the best of all worlds: designed to run on lower grade and weight track, but able to pull one heck of a consist. Again, just a thought. Maybe, as you point out Dave, shortlines are the answer.

Again, everything I mentioned is hypotehtical; it could very easily be shrunk to two, the west and the east. There is one point that I think everyone is agreeing, however; if something isn't done soon, we won't have any mainline steam to argue about.

We do have a dandy discussion going, don't we?

TJG


Port Huron Museum

tjgaffney@phmuseum.org

> I see your point Dave, but can you honestly
> say that, for instance, a 4449 doesn't draw
> some from the east, or that a 1361 or 2102
> couldn't draw someone from the west or
> south?

Not implying that at all. I would love to see 449 in Atlanta and was hoping that the COG mentioned as a running ground for the K4 was Central of Georgia. There is some talk of a mainline midwestern locomotive making a trip into the deep south next year.

I don't care where it is from, the general public doesn't care other than it is steam, and national tours are definitely a fine idea.

Leads me to wonder if, like setting up a bus and truck theatrical tour, once the majors are booked to cover the costs, less remunerative but equally important smaller venues could be scheduled in between?

So ebody who religiously follows the mainline excursion business needs to take this ball and run with it - how many and where are the mainline excursions happening over a 5 year period now?

Dave

irondave@bellsouth.net

> Dave makes a wonderful arguement. Here is
> another possible upside: consistent
> locomotive usage, wear, and maintenance.
> Here is a possible scenario, with 5 possible
> locomotives (I'm not playing favorites,
> unless its subliminal).

> Say we divide the trips into four reigions
> instead of two: Southwest/ Southeast, West/
> Pacific Northwest, Midwest/ Central, and
> East/ Northeast.

> In any given year, four steamer represent a
> given area, and are given say, three year
> turns. If it started next year, here's how
> it might go:

> Southwest/ Southeast: 2003-2006- T&NO
> 745

> 2007-2010- L&N 152

> 2011-2014- A&WP 290

> West/ Pacific Northwest: 2003-2006- Santa Fe
> 3751

> 2007-2010- SP 4449

> 2011-2014- SP&S 700

> Midwest/ Central: 2003-2006- Frisco 1522

> 2007-2010- PM 1225

> 2011-2014- NKP 587 or 765

> East/ Northeast: 2003-2006- Reading 2102

> 2007-2010- PRR 1361

> 2011-2014- B&M 3713

> Again, this is totally hypothetical, but it
> could work. Yes, many would complain,but
> think of the anticipation of waiting for
> "your locomotive" to take
> "Its turn" in the lineup. Another
> added benefit is that your not using the
> same loco over and over, and so people don't
> get tired of seeing the same locomotive year
> after year. It give those operating and
> maintenaning this engines realistic time
> frame goals as well. As an added bonus, the
> next "engine in line" could be the
> backup as well.

> Just a thought.

> TJG

Those of us on the Milwaukee Road #261 would like to thank you for prematurely retiring the locomotive. It will leave so much more time in the summer to edge the lawn and complete all of the "honey-do" chores.
Don C.


old_fxrs@msn.com

> Those of us on the Milwaukee Road #261 would
> like to thank you for prematurely retiring
> the locomotive. It will leave so much more
> time in the summer to edge the lawn and
> complete all of the "honey-do"
> chores.
> Don C.

Sorry Don-

That's why I'm going to quit making suggestions, as inevitably somebody gets left out, and or upset when you do hypothetical likes this. Even though I did state that I knew I would leave people out (I was thinking as I was typing, a dangerous combination), it has been noted I left some significant gaps, including both Soo Line Locomotives, Milw. Road 261, etc. I also didn't mention GTW 6325, or UP 3985 or UP 844, as I considered that they would most likely operate whether this happens or not, as they are operated by the railroads that they run on. I honestly didn't mean to snub; sorry. This does however, prove Dave's point that maybe their needs to be a true summit of people here who have a heck of alot
more to do with museum steam than myself!
TJG


Port Huron Museum

tjgaffney@phmuseum.org